Calculating the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopies only

Is it necessary? Can it be gamed?

Douglas Rex, Prasanna L. Ponugoti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Current recommendations are to calculate the adenoma detection rate (ADR) in screening colonoscopies only. The need to confine the measure to screening has not been established. Methods We retrospectively assessed our quality database for whether calculating ADR from screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopies (overall ADR) would alter conclusions about the performance of colonoscopists, compared to using an ADR based only on screening colonoscopies. We also prospectively tested the extent to which one physician could corrupt the screening-only ADR by changing the procedure indication after reviewing the examination findings. Results For 15 physicians, screening ADRs differed from the overall ADR by a mean of 2.6 percentage points (range 0-6.9 percentage points). Using the overall ADR rather than screening ADR changed the ADR from just below to just above the recommended screening threshold for one physician. In the prospective assessment, a single expert colonoscopist utilized indication gaming in patients with both screening and diagnostic indications and was able to increase his apparent screening-only ADR from 48.4% to 55.1%. Conclusions Use of an overall ADR rather than screening-only ADR could simplify ADR measurement, increase the number of examinations available to measure ADR, seldom affect whether a doctor meets recommended ADR thresholds, and eliminate the potential for gaming the ADR by changing the colonoscopy indication.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1069-1074
Number of pages6
JournalEndoscopy
Volume49
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2017

Fingerprint

Colonoscopy
Adenoma
Physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Calculating the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopies only : Is it necessary? Can it be gamed? / Rex, Douglas; Ponugoti, Prasanna L.

In: Endoscopy, Vol. 49, No. 11, 01.11.2017, p. 1069-1074.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rex, Douglas ; Ponugoti, Prasanna L. / Calculating the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopies only : Is it necessary? Can it be gamed?. In: Endoscopy. 2017 ; Vol. 49, No. 11. pp. 1069-1074.
@article{133354e58c2f464d852b7508e47081c9,
title = "Calculating the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopies only: Is it necessary? Can it be gamed?",
abstract = "Background Current recommendations are to calculate the adenoma detection rate (ADR) in screening colonoscopies only. The need to confine the measure to screening has not been established. Methods We retrospectively assessed our quality database for whether calculating ADR from screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopies (overall ADR) would alter conclusions about the performance of colonoscopists, compared to using an ADR based only on screening colonoscopies. We also prospectively tested the extent to which one physician could corrupt the screening-only ADR by changing the procedure indication after reviewing the examination findings. Results For 15 physicians, screening ADRs differed from the overall ADR by a mean of 2.6 percentage points (range 0-6.9 percentage points). Using the overall ADR rather than screening ADR changed the ADR from just below to just above the recommended screening threshold for one physician. In the prospective assessment, a single expert colonoscopist utilized indication gaming in patients with both screening and diagnostic indications and was able to increase his apparent screening-only ADR from 48.4{\%} to 55.1{\%}. Conclusions Use of an overall ADR rather than screening-only ADR could simplify ADR measurement, increase the number of examinations available to measure ADR, seldom affect whether a doctor meets recommended ADR thresholds, and eliminate the potential for gaming the ADR by changing the colonoscopy indication.",
author = "Douglas Rex and Ponugoti, {Prasanna L.}",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1055/s-0043-113445",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "49",
pages = "1069--1074",
journal = "Endoscopy",
issn = "0013-726X",
publisher = "Georg Thieme Verlag",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Calculating the adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopies only

T2 - Is it necessary? Can it be gamed?

AU - Rex, Douglas

AU - Ponugoti, Prasanna L.

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Background Current recommendations are to calculate the adenoma detection rate (ADR) in screening colonoscopies only. The need to confine the measure to screening has not been established. Methods We retrospectively assessed our quality database for whether calculating ADR from screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopies (overall ADR) would alter conclusions about the performance of colonoscopists, compared to using an ADR based only on screening colonoscopies. We also prospectively tested the extent to which one physician could corrupt the screening-only ADR by changing the procedure indication after reviewing the examination findings. Results For 15 physicians, screening ADRs differed from the overall ADR by a mean of 2.6 percentage points (range 0-6.9 percentage points). Using the overall ADR rather than screening ADR changed the ADR from just below to just above the recommended screening threshold for one physician. In the prospective assessment, a single expert colonoscopist utilized indication gaming in patients with both screening and diagnostic indications and was able to increase his apparent screening-only ADR from 48.4% to 55.1%. Conclusions Use of an overall ADR rather than screening-only ADR could simplify ADR measurement, increase the number of examinations available to measure ADR, seldom affect whether a doctor meets recommended ADR thresholds, and eliminate the potential for gaming the ADR by changing the colonoscopy indication.

AB - Background Current recommendations are to calculate the adenoma detection rate (ADR) in screening colonoscopies only. The need to confine the measure to screening has not been established. Methods We retrospectively assessed our quality database for whether calculating ADR from screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopies (overall ADR) would alter conclusions about the performance of colonoscopists, compared to using an ADR based only on screening colonoscopies. We also prospectively tested the extent to which one physician could corrupt the screening-only ADR by changing the procedure indication after reviewing the examination findings. Results For 15 physicians, screening ADRs differed from the overall ADR by a mean of 2.6 percentage points (range 0-6.9 percentage points). Using the overall ADR rather than screening ADR changed the ADR from just below to just above the recommended screening threshold for one physician. In the prospective assessment, a single expert colonoscopist utilized indication gaming in patients with both screening and diagnostic indications and was able to increase his apparent screening-only ADR from 48.4% to 55.1%. Conclusions Use of an overall ADR rather than screening-only ADR could simplify ADR measurement, increase the number of examinations available to measure ADR, seldom affect whether a doctor meets recommended ADR thresholds, and eliminate the potential for gaming the ADR by changing the colonoscopy indication.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032466898&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032466898&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1055/s-0043-113445

DO - 10.1055/s-0043-113445

M3 - Article

VL - 49

SP - 1069

EP - 1074

JO - Endoscopy

JF - Endoscopy

SN - 0013-726X

IS - 11

ER -